KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum Would you take Coutinho on loan?

You’re talking about my household. You asked me the question in case you forgot? You’re too busy trying to be right and cover your lies that you’re forgetting what you’re writing.

And you lied, unless you dont have a mortgage or never gone on holiday since you have one

The fact that is being argued here is that you said FSG have taken money out of the club (£30m) for themselves, but really it was taken to repay an agreed loan to extend the Main Stand, which delivers more fans and increased revenue, so was done to benefit the club, FSG have not taken the money out of LFC for themselves, whichever way the loan has been structured.

The money they have taken is for themselves, not for anybody else and any shareholder will take money as a loan reimbursement first + the revenue generated from the main stand is about 12m per year, profits will be lower than that when you remove the costs, especially as a big part it is hospitality, therefore more employees and facilities.

So either way they have taken money out but of course they do it in a clever way as they are aware of the backlash, remember what happened with ticket prices increase and then furloughing. Did you know 30m went to them over 2 years I didn't, I might have missed it, did you?

I knew £30 million was being paid back to FSG for the loan they provided for the Main stand improvement, that was widely reported over the years, I think the total loan was £110 million which was to be paid back over 5 years from what i read.

Is there another £30 million they have been paid in the last 2 years that I have missed?

Sorry, I didnt know that the club had to reimburse a loan for a capital project over 5 years, this is crazy and unnecessary. Every company finances capital projects through long term loans. If you have a link please share.

Thanks, I knew FSG loaned the 110m, but didnt know we were supposed to pay over 6 years and thought it was interest free, you dont do capital investments with short term loans, that burdens a company.

I think the reasoning was the increase in revenue from attendance/corporate will pay the loan off in 5-6 years, so after that it's profit. Liverpool fans were touchy over the leveraged buy out models of H&G and the Glazers, so I think loans on the club wouldn't have looked good, so short term loans from the owners would go better with the fans.

I heard on a Podcast the other day that Glazers have taken over a $billion out of Utd !!!! interesting read....

https://therepublikofmancunia.com/shocking-figures-show-how-much-the-glazers-have-taken-from-united/

Indeed, the Glazers have been ripping United off but United generate huge revenues. FSG cannot do that today as we do not have that sort of revenue, but it's the same principle IMO. The Glazers are the worst, without them United would easily compete with Real and Barca for players. FSG has seen the value of the club increase from their 300m or so investment to more than 2 billion, injecting some 100-200m capital for capital projects meant to increase revenues would have been fairer IMO. Having the 14th net spend in the league looks cheap